Once and for all...are humans or robots better for Mars?

On 07/03/2011 07:42 PM, Jim G. wrote:
Greg Goss sent the following on Sun, 03 Jul 2011 01:06:29 -0600:
bob wrote:

The terrorist now know what a great target a nuke plant with elevated
waste core storage pools are. A business sized jet loaded with
explosives could take out a pools cooling system.

But you were talking about Indian Point. Indian Point has their
storage pools set into bedrock, not "elevated".

So why the bait and switch?

I've given up on the guy. He's either extremely dim or extremely good at
trolling. I can't quite tell which, but either is a waste of time.

Don't assume he can't be both.

Fred J. McCall wrote:

And yet bam no cooling pool disasters in Japan, despite everything you
claim is required having happened.

Um, they haven't finished the clean-up yet. Unit four blew its roof
off with a hydrogen explosion even though its reactor core was empty.
Where did the hydrogen come from? The fuel in the storage pool had to
have been exposed to air. By the time your zirconium is generating
hydrogen, you're doing quite a bit of damage to the fuel all around.

One of the pools, I forget which, isn't holding water. You sprinkle
it in the top, it comes out the bottom. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Except that the equipment for "rinse" (filtering and decontam) is
apparently not working right yet.

We can declare "bam" when they invite the politicians to cut the
ribbon on the memorial park.

(I believe in nuclear power, and bought Uranium mining stock a couple
of months ago. But we have to keep reality in mind.)
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27

On Jul 3, 4:13*am, (William December Starr) wrote:
In article ,
William Mook said:

[Fred J. McCall said:]
So in MookieWorld Obama is a tool of the British Empire (which
hasn't been around for quite a while now)? *Who knew?

Lyndon LaRouche

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgcdRCWEt4Q

And if you can't trust Lyndon LaRouche for accurate representations
of reality, who can you?

-- wds

Some people can't get over being transfixed by Madison Avenue.

On Jul 4, 2:39*am, Greg Goss wrote:
Fred J. McCall wrote:

And yet bam no cooling pool disasters in Japan, despite everything you
claim is required having happened.

Um, they haven't finished the clean-up yet. *Unit four blew its roof
off with a hydrogen explosion even though its reactor core was empty.
Where did the hydrogen come from? *The fuel in the storage pool had to
have been exposed to air. *By the time your zirconium is generating
hydrogen, you're doing quite a bit of damage to the fuel all around.

One of the pools, I forget which, isn't holding water. *You sprinkle
it in the top, it comes out the bottom. *Lather, rinse, repeat.
Except that the equipment for "rinse" (filtering and decontam) is
apparently not working right yet.

We can declare "bam" when they invite the politicians to cut the
ribbon on the memorial park.

(I believe in nuclear power, and bought Uranium mining stock a couple
of months ago. *But we have to keep reality in mind.)
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27

they havent even started the real clean up yet... and since they
covered up the amount of radiation released from the very start many
wouldnt trust them in any case....

chernobyl liquidators moved a statue as a memorial no doubt the
japanese will do the same eventually.

first comes stabilizing the reactors, removing all the waste cores to
safe storage, theres concerns the racks holding the aready damaged
cores possibily starting a chain reaction.......

meanwhile at any moment a aftershock can do more damage

Unit four blew its roof
off with a hydrogen explosion even though its reactor core was empty.
Where did the hydrogen come from? *The fuel in the storage pool had to
have been exposed to air. *By the time your zirconium is generating
hydrogen, you're doing quite a bit of damage to the fuel all around.

True, but no cooling pool fire spreading tons of radioactive material
into the air, as Bobbert repeatedly has predicted. *

most of what was released blew out to the ocean. apparentlky the cores
werent fully exposed...... it was only a partial burning.

like having a house fire with home damaged but didnt burn down

Fred J. McCall wrote:


Again, when terrorists can muster a massive earthquake and a huge
tsunami to prevent anyone from taking any action, I'll start worrying
about terrorists attacking cooling pools.

Now that we've discovered how fragile the outer containment is on the
GE boiling water design, throwing an airliner at it makes sense. The
reactor may be inside a heavy-duty steel structure, but there isn't
much wall around the pools, and the fuel structures in the pools is
startlingly fragile.

All four buildings blew off their outer containment in fairly minor
hydrogen burns. Not a good sign for claiming that the containment is
built to withstand an airliner impact. And the waste fuel isn't
inside the heavy-duty inner containment.

We need to come up with a (largely political) process to move the
waste to some kind of dry storage, preferably glassified.

Meanwhile, every time someone mentions Fukushima, we should point them
to that CNG facility burning off after the tsunami, and ask what kind
of health impact toxins THAT put into the air. Powering modern
society requires dense energy sources, and those all have side
effects. Coal means that we can't eat tuna more than once a week
because of mercury levels. Etc.

We can declare "bam" when they invite the politicians to cut the
ribbon on the memorial park.


Hardly the 'bam' Bobbert is claiming WILL happen.


(I believe in nuclear power, and bought Uranium mining stock a couple
of months ago. But we have to keep reality in mind.)


Yes, we must, and that includes the unreality of the claims folks like
Bobbert make (which you are apparently supporting).

I wasn't disagreeint with Bobbert. I may even have him killfiled. I
run so far behind on some newsgroups that I'm not sure what I've
already read. I was disagreeing on the disproof, which is not the
same thing as agreeing to the proof.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27

On Jul 4, 6:13*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Jul 3, 4:13 am, (William December Starr) wrote:
In article ,
William Mook said:

[Fred J. McCall said:]
So in MookieWorld Obama is a tool of the British Empire (which
hasn't been around for quite a while now)? Who knew?

Lyndon LaRouche

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgcdRCWEt4Q

And if you can't trust Lyndon LaRouche for accurate representations
of reality, who can you?

Some people can't get over being transfixed by Madison Avenue.

And others are apparently permanently stuck on stupid, ready to
believe any and every insane conspiracy theory that comes down the
pike.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

haha - its funny when Fred talks about his own mental shortcomings and
thinks he's talking of others. lol.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...54052040284660
http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/w...-love-war.html

On Jul 4, 5:13*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Greg Goss wrote:
Fred J. McCall wrote:

Again, when terrorists can muster a massive earthquake and a huge
tsunami to prevent anyone from taking any action, I'll start worrying
about terrorists attacking cooling pools.

Now that we've discovered how fragile the outer containment is on the
GE boiling water design, throwing an airliner at it makes sense. *The
reactor may be inside a heavy-duty steel structure, but there isn't
much wall around the pools, and the fuel structures in the pools is
startlingly fragile.

The building is just there to keep the weather off, so it being
'fragile' is hardly a surprise. *The pools themselves are not nearly
as fragile as is being claimed.



All four buildings blew off their outer containment in fairly minor
hydrogen burns. *Not a good sign for claiming that the containment is
built to withstand an airliner impact. *And the waste fuel isn't
inside the heavy-duty inner containment.

The buildings are just weather shields. *No one has ever claimed
they're "build to withstand an airliner impact". *The 'waste fuel'
(which isn't what it is) is in a cooling pool with big thick walls.



We need to come up with a (largely political) process to move the
waste to some kind of dry storage, preferably glassified.

You can't do that until it has cooled for a year or two. *That's the
original purpose of the cooling pools, after all.



Meanwhile, every time someone mentions Fukushima, we should point them
to that CNG facility burning off after the tsunami, and ask what kind
of health impact toxins THAT put into the air. *Powering modern
society requires dense energy sources, and those all have side
effects. *Coal means that we can't eat tuna more than once a week
because of mercury levels. *Etc.

Coal has also put more radiation into the environment than nuclear
power has.





We can declare "bam" when they invite the politicians to cut the
ribbon on the memorial park.

Hardly the 'bam' Bobbert is claiming WILL happen.

(I believe in nuclear power, and bought Uranium mining stock a couple
of months ago. *But we have to keep reality in mind.)

Yes, we must, and that includes the unreality of the claims folks like
Bobbert make (which you are apparently supporting).

I wasn't disagreeint with Bobbert. *I may even have him killfiled. *I
run so far behind on some newsgroups that I'm not sure what I've
already read. *I was disagreeing on the disproof, which is not the
same thing as agreeing to the proof.

Perhaps you should know what is being disproved before you disagree
with it?

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

coal cant instanetously make a area around its plant uninhabitible,
nor poision the ocean, nor be a terrorist target.

in comparison with nuke power coal is safe.......

The BWR cooling pools and the reactors themselves were intentially
built on the cheap to save construction costs, so much so the design
engineers quit stating a meltdown couldnt be contained

On Jul 2, 11:06*pm, William Mook wrote:
So in MookieWorld Obama is a tool of the British Empire (which hasn't
been around for quite a while now)? *Who knew?

Lyndon LaRouche

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgcdRCWEt4Q

The *BBC and others

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zcAC...?v=4DhJIsxYKTw

If you were a truly smart person or part of a secret faith-based
cartel/cabal of those trying to dominate Earth in most every way that
truly matters, from time to time you'd intentionally let a naive fool
such as President BHO takeover, then sit back with all the usual cloak
and dagger outside resources in order to continue with the GOP/ZNR
redneck agenda.

That's about what seems to be ongoing.

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://www.wanttoknow.info/
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Meanwhile, every time someone mentions Fukushima, we should point them
to that CNG facility burning off after the tsunami, and ask what kind
of health impact toxins THAT put into the air. *Powering modern
society requires dense energy sources, and those all have side
effects. *Coal means that we can't eat tuna more than once a week
because of mercury levels. *Etc.

The byproducts of burning natural gas is actually pretty clean

Pacific tuna now picks up radiation from leaking japanese reactor
water, the tuna migrates yearly from japan to US waters... where they
are caught and eaten.....

Terrorists dont need to level any reactor or waste core pool to cause
a disaster. all they need do is damage the cooling system. GE BWRs are
a good target given their lightweight construction

Truly all nuke plants should be built to not only avoid meltdowns but
SURVIVE MELTDOWNS without leaking or blowing up...

things like triply redundant containment....